We use Optical Character Recognition (OCR) during our scanning and processing workflow to make the content of each page searchable. You can view the automatically generated text below as well as copy and paste individual pieces of text to quote in your own work.
Text recognition is never 100% accurate. Many parts of the scanned page may not be reflected in the OCR text output, including: images, page layout, certain fonts or handwriting.
MOTION-PICTURE JURISDICTIONAL DISPUTES 1583
We liad a contention with the plumbers over that, for the simple reason that when the architect would put it in the plumbing sp>ecitications, it was quite natural for the contractor to figure that when he figured his plumbing contract or his bids.
Mr. IvEARNs. You claimed that as a wood substitute ?
Mr. HuTCHESON. Well, it was in the specifications, so he would do it.
Now, that is where we get into a controversy with the plumbers, but it did not last so long. We entered into an agreement with the plumbers, and we have it today. The plumbers said, ''O. K., that's your work, you do it." It is minor, but just the same it is work for a carpenter.
I give that as an illustration. In that case, the architects were to blame for that jurisdictional controversy.
Mr. Owens. Well, I will not argue with you about that one way or the other. But that still does not answer my question.
Mr. HuTCHESON. Congressman, I am not arguing, I just try to instruct.
Mr. Owt:ns. I use that word advisedly. You did settle that situation between yourselves?
Mr. HuTCHESON. Yes.
Mr. Owens. But here we have a situation which has gone on for 3 years and still is not settled.
Mr. HuTCHESON. All right, Mr. Congressman, let me recite to you some more settlements.
For instance, the matter of metal trim. I am not going into that in detail, but I give you credit for knowing what I mean when I say metal trim.
That controversy went on for 19 years between ourselves and the sheet-metal workers. We finally reached on agreement, and I do not mind saying to you now, that if those outside would have kept their hands off, we probably would have reached an agreement long before we did, but after 19 years the sheet-metal workers and ourselves settled the controversy.
Mr. Owens. And did strikes take place for that 19-year period?
Mr. HuTCHESON. Oh, many times. But I will say this, of course : In the first instance, it came on as a controversy in 1909 in New York City. Judge Gaynor made a finding on that. On the representation of the employers. Judge Gaynor decided that should be carpenters' work, because it took the knowledge and skill of a carpenter to be pro]:)erly performed, because the metal principle of setting a door jamb, casing it and everything, was just the same as wood.
But notwithstanding that, over a period of 19 years — well, it was not so serious. The contractors would come to me and say, "Here, what's the matter? You are holding up our jobs. We are your friends." I said, "Well, I realize that." but if you if you are going to inconvenience anybody it is usually friends you inconvenience first.
]\Ir. Owens. I am just going to ask one more question, or one after it in connection with it.
You heard Mr. Casey make the charge. You heard us talkinir about building not proceeding in the United States because of jurisdictional strikes.
I ask you this : Do you think that in view of the fact sometimes there are thousands of dollars lost per minute because of a jurisdictional strike, don't you believe